Re: [Jwt-reg-review] Request to register claim: sig_val_claims

Honestly, I can't really wrap my head around this kind of signature
indirection so I'll just say that I'm okay with the registration of the
claim name "sig_val_claims".

Because the document is defining this SVT, which is one particular kind of
JWT, I wonder if it'd be worthwhile to consider explicitly typing it, as
recommended in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8725#section-3.11,
with something like a "typ":"svt+jwt" header rather than the general and
kinda meaningless "typ":"jwt"?

On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 7:44 PM Mike Jones <Michael.Jones=
40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> I approve of the registration of this claim.
>
>                                 -- Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jwt-reg-review <jwt-reg-review-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of
> Stefan Santesson
> Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 8:33 AM
> To: jwt-reg-review@ietf.org
> Cc: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Jwt-reg-review] Request to register claim:
> sig_val_claims
>
> Hi,
>
> The draft https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-santesson-svt/ is being
> requested for publication as individual submission
>
> This draft includes the request to register the claim name
> "sig_val_claims" as follows:
>
> 6.1.  Claim Names Registration
>
>
>    This section registers the "sig_val_claims" claim name in the IANA
>    "JSON Web Token Claims" registry established by Section 10.1 in
>    [RFC7519].
>
> 6.1.1.  Registry Contents
>
>    *  Claim Name: "sig_val_claims"
>    *  Claim Description: Signature Validation Token Claims
>    *  Change Controller: IESG
>    *  Specification Document(s): Section 3.2.3 of {this document}
>
>
> The draft specifies a Token having the form of a JWT which includes this
> defined claim.
>
> The rationale for this claim is described in the referenced document.
>
> The solution is deployed is real services and it is considered for
> national government usage which is the main reason to publish the
> specification as an informational RFC.
>
>
>
> /Stefan Santesson
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jwt-reg-review mailing list
> Jwt-reg-review@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jwt-reg-review
> _______________________________________________
> Jwt-reg-review mailing list
> Jwt-reg-review@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jwt-reg-review
>

-- 
_CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email may contain confidential and privileged 
material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, 
distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited.  If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately 
by e-mail and delete the message and any file attachments from your 
computer. Thank you._